1 CGHC010394412024 2026:CGHC:38634 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5751 of 2024 Pratappur Swastik Mahila Sva-Sahayata Samuh Through Its President Devkumari Sahu W/o Santosh Kumar, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward Village Pratappur Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector (Food Department) Bemetara, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Tehsildar Navagarh District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Assistant Food Officer/ Food Inspector Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Sub Divisional Officer (R) Navagarh, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Pragati Mahila Sva-Sahayata Samuh Ghoghara, Block Navagarh, District Bemetara, Through its President Krishna Bai Sahu, W/o Shatruhan Sahu, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title downloaded from CIS Periphery) SHYNA AJAY Digitally signed by SHYNA AJAY Date: 2026.09.02 17:06:54 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Purnendra Kichariya, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer S B: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 01/09/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs : 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate and suitable writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) quash and set-aside the impugned notice/order dated dated 06.11.2024 (Annexure P-1) in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other order which may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case including cost of the petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by the impugned order dated 6.11.2024, the concerned SDO (R), Nawagarh, District Bemetara has cancelled the license of the petitioner- Society for operation and supply of food grains under the Fair Price Shop, based on vague allegations. He submits that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner and the procedure envisaged under the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (in short “the Control Order, 2016”) has not been followed. He submits that the impugned order has 3 been passed in an arbitrary manner in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned order is unsustainable in law and is liable to be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that a show cause notice was duly issued to the petitioner, to which the petitioner filed its reply. He submits that after due consideration of the reply as well as Panchnama and other relevant materials on record, the impugned order was passed. As such, proper procedure was followed and the petitioner was afforded adequate opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the impugned order suffers from no legal infirmity and no interference by this Court is warranted. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition with utmost circumpsection. 5. Evidently, by the impugned order dated 06.11.2024, the SDO(Revenue), Nawagarh cancelled the license of the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop. As per the mandatory provisions of the Control Order, 2016, a detailed enquiry is required to be conducted wherein the affected party must be afforded a proper and effective opportunity of hearing before passing any adverse order. However, a perusal of the record reveals that the prescribed procedure under the Control Order, 2016, was not followed in accordance with law and no proper opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. Consequently, in my view, the impugned order is arbitrary, unsustainable in the eyes of law and liable to be set aside. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 06.11.2024 is set-aside. 4 However, liberty is reserved to the concerned SDO(Revenue), Nawagarh, to initiate fresh proceedings on the basis of the suspension order dated 16.10.2024. The SDO shall afford a due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, consider its reply and supporting documents and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Control Order, 2016, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 7. It is directed that the interim order dated 21.11.2024 passed by this Court shall continue to remain in force until the final order is passed by the concerned SDO(R) in the fresh enquiry. 8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the Petition is finally disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Shyna Ajay